Game Economy. Why is it like this and what does Crafting have to do with it?

"

Jitter912#4278 wrote:

Relying on rng to cover up design flaws

What do you mean by "rng" actually ? I guess we can count,
Drop rate
Mods weight
Player's choice (not fully deterministic since there is no free character/item creation mode. In terms of "min-max", there can be no DPS to million DPS at least in current state. I mean we can do some stupid things :P)

I can say those are matters of design but don't really understand "flaws -> lazy -> rampant -> down hill" stream line.

You mean, not like Ruthless mode or make it "basically" same like PoE1 or something like "PoE2 is not completely non sense but partially (for you)" or it can be better ?

In those cases, I like ruthless mode the best. I can go full kitty mode. (follow something moving or dropped, tinkering mouse and meow.)

Edit
Taking into account the findings in the discussion, I assume we will be identifying some changes in the gaps, even if they might not be considered a full revamp :)

For a system to be interactive, I think it needs to have some kind of consistency (so that I've been trying to identify the minimum structure.)

"

Jitter912#4278 wrote:

What a bloated post .....

here

Nobody wants to play a game where nothing drops
Nobody wants to play virtual stock trader.

If you describe a session in terms of currency, the game sucks.
When currency acquisition is the game , its a job.

A complex crafting system that made it inaccessible to 90% of the players is what
gave crafting its value, nobody wants to do it .. but being good at it was worthwhile.

Relying on rng to cover up design flaws is lazy, its rampant in the game and the game is going down hill.

YES! Thank you. That also begs two questions, "what is the point of ssf?" and "what is the point of the content itself?" I heard a rumour that more crafting is on it's way, but as it sits, SSF should just be removed or drops need to be balanced around SSF. Every build I see posted or on youtube has melting maelstrom, and they tell you to just go buy it. Need to fix resistances? Go buy it from the market. I kinda wonder what the point of the game is right now.

"

JudaRoars#7244 wrote:

I kinda wonder what the point of the game is right now.

Based on how difficult it is to reach level 100 (and in general any next level), and how much everything depends on the market, the goal of the game is to compete in how well you grind in order to be able to get the best equipment in the only source (market) to reach level 100 and beat all content.

"

Radonegsky#6656 wrote:

This, of course, will have a huge impact. We will move from the market of goods to the market of services. [...] The gap between the poor and the rich will be reduced. [...]

You really think so? Average players who don't fall into the category of most invested people playing the game are supposed to offer services? Services for what? Carries? How, as casuals?

A service economy is supposed to bring rich and poor closer? Absolutely not in my opinion.

More deterministic crafting, balanced classes, a good build variety and in-game direct purchases would already help tremendously.

Not being able to sell gear you've worn, in an ARPG, would just lead to an even greater price explosion for chase items, while actually crafting them would remain near impossible for all but the very, very, veeeeeeeerrrrryyyyyyyyy top few crafters whom you can count on one hand.

"

staytuned2k#6008 wrote:

A service economy is supposed to bring rich and poor closer? Absolutely not in my opinion.

Yes, because the "Rich" will not be able to resell the purchased item and return the money. Thus, the item ceases to be an item, but becomes a service. Blizzards do not use this for nothing, it is not a fact that this is why, but it was probably taken into account.

"

staytuned2k#6008 wrote:

More deterministic crafting...

... kills the market (it will no longer be needed) and the current concept of complexity (this is an extreme value of course). When making strong changes here, you need to understand that you are offering major game changes, not just "bug fixes".

"

staytuned2k#6008 wrote:

... balanced classes, a good build variety and in-game direct purchases would already help tremendously.

Of course. I indicate the dependence of market health on the balance and variability of builds. But that doesn't change the fact that the game is about the market.

Quoting on this forum is such a pain...

"

Radonegsky#6656 wrote:

Yes, because the "Rich" will not be able to resell the purchased item and return the money. Thus, the item ceases to be an item, but becomes a service. Blizzards do not use this for nothing, it is not a fact that this is why, but it was probably taken into account.

The rich are rich because they understand the game better. They know how to play the market and be the most efficient in what they do. The actual billionaires of POE are not solo players either. They're organized in groups.

They game the market now. They'll be gaming the services as well. Just as normal players cannot compete in the trade game, they won't be able to compete in the service game either. You're fighting against professionally organized structures. You lose out no matter what.

"

Radonegsky#6656 wrote:

... kills the market (it will no longer be needed) and the current concept of complexity (this is an extreme value of course). When making strong changes here, you need to understand that you are offering major game changes, not just "bug fixes".

Yes and no. Deterministic crafting doesn't kill the market because deterministic doesn't automatically mean free. It does however mean a surplus in available items, driving prices down. The market would be changed, not destroyed. You still need to grind for the materials required for crafting, which remains influenced by both RNG and your available time, so the incentive to visit the market and purchase items people have crafted remains virtually the same.

You might even create a new niche market, where people are crafting items on order, with the specific stats their clients requested.

"

Radonegsky#6656 wrote:

Of course. I indicate the dependence of market health on the balance and variability of builds. But that doesn't change the fact that the game is about the market.

I'd agree if SSF didn't exist, and if GGG's idea with POE2 wasn't to reach a broader target audience. If the game is supposed to be Wolf of Wallstreet the ARPG, they should be okay with losing a huge percentage of their new player base, because for most people playing "market" isn't fun at all.